Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2021 DAILYLAW 1089 (KAR)

SHRI ERAPPA v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/569/2021 · 2026-07-17

M G S Kamal

body2021

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.569 OF 2021 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN : SHRI ERAPPA S/O LATE PAPAIAH AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS RESIDENT OF NAGONDANAHALLI VILLAGE BANGALORE EAST TALUK BENGALURU-560 -066 …PETITIONERS (BY SHRI.GOWTHAMDEV C.ULLAL, ADVOCATE) AND : 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF HOME VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE-01 BY ITS SECRETARY 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE OFFICE OF THE POLICE COMMISSIONER NO.1, INFANTRY ROAD BANGALORE-560 001 3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE MAHADEVPUR DIVISION NO.3, CHINMAYA MISSION HOSPITAL ROAD HOYSALA NAGAR, INDIRANAGAR BENGALURU-38 4. THE POLICE INSPECTOR WHITE FIELD POLICE STATION WHITE FIELD, BANGALORE-560 066 2 5. SMT.K.POORNIMA SRINIVAS W/O D.T.SRINIVAS ... RESPONDENTS (VIDE ORDER DATED 12.01.2021 RESPONDENT NO.5 IS DELETED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 4 TO PROVIDE POLICE PROTECTION TO THE PETITIONER IN RESPECT OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY BY CONSIDERING THE ANNEXURES A, B AND C. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER Heard Shri Gowthamdev C.Ullal, learned advocate for petitioner and Shri M.Vinod Kumar, learned AGA for the respondents. 2. Shri Ullal submitted that petitioner is the owner of the petition schedule property. He has obtained a decree in his favour. Petitioner has submitted representations as per Annexures A, B and C and he would be satisfied if a direction is issued to respondent-police to consider Annexure-C as per the decision of the Hon'ble 3 Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh and others1 and accord necessary protection. 3. In the circumstances, this petition is disposed of by directing respondents to consider Annexure-C and to take action in accordance with the law laid down in Lalita Kumari's case and to accord necessary protection required in aid of the Civil Court's decree. No costs. Sd/- JUDGE Yn. 1 (2014) 2 SCC 1